Mick, just out of curiosity, what results of his direct actions hurt racing in Illinois??

You phrased your question carefully Mel so I will answer with equal care.

This is just my opinion but RLD rejected the idea of casinos in Illinois and fought that change as hard as possible. My opionion at the time and now is that he should have embraced that change and looked forward to how racing could benefit from casinos. I worked at AP in the late 60s and 70s and I recall there were two class of patrons, clubhouse and grandstand. AP could have catered to high rollers and my mothers obsession with nickel slots on different floors (the higher the floor, the higher the roller) and brought a good deal more income into AP. Hell, Casinos were only supposed to be on water at the time and he had that great big pond to build a casino on if he wanted to, or he could have lobbied that AP was already a gambling establsihment and didn't require water.

Then AP could operate year round on the casino side and be generating jobs, taxes and income and not sit idle for seven motnhs a year. Had RLD that vision he could have brought more money to Illinois racing and as a result better purses and horses. At least that was my opinion.

You phrased your question carefully Mel so I will answer with equal care.

This is just my opinion but RLD rejected the idea of casinos in Illinois and fought that change as hard as possible. My opionion at the time and now is that he should have embraced that change and looked forward to how racing could benefit from casinos. I worked at AP in the late 60s and 70s and I recall there were two class of patrons, clubhouse and grandstand. AP could have catered to high rollers and my mothers obsession with nickel slots on different floors (the higher the floor, the higher the roller) and brought a good deal more income into AP. Hell, Casinos were only supposed to be on water at the time and he had that great big pond to build a casino on if he wanted to, or he could have lobbied that AP was already a gambling establsihment and didn't require water.

Then AP could operate year round on the casino side and be generating jobs, taxes and income and not sit idle for seven motnhs a year. Had RLD that vision he could have brought more money to Illinois racing and as a result better purses and horses. At least that was my opinion.

I don't think that idea would have flown at that time. The riverboats got in for the taxes produced and partially because they had to be located in economically depressed areas, where the people there really did not worry about having a casino in their backyard. The good people of Arlington Heights are barely accepting the concept now. Horse racing was still riding high at the time and the idea of having slots at a track was not considered because the experience of horse racing and betting was above the one-armed bandits in the gambling pecking order. The thought at the time was that casinos could take away some customers, thus the casiNO campaign. As we now know, casinos took away a majority of the customers, and as a result, the situation is casinos are the magic bullet used to save racing. No one had this vision at the time you are talking about.

That sure sound simple enough. I wonder what was wrong with that thought in that man's mind?

This was way back before the idea of the racino even came along. Back then, giving a casino license to the tracks really wasn't on any of the Illinois power-brokers' agendas. They were just talking about bringing in casino gaming ("for the kids", naturally), and a small group of well-connected businessmen was just coincidentally all lined up to get the 10 licenses, no doubt due to their long history of caring so much about the kids. Dick and the rest of the track owners weren't among those. So the tracks fought the idea. IMHO it wasn't like they could have been included at the time. Dick D. is a smart enough/savvy enough/greedy enough businessman that if he could have been included at that time, I'm sure he would have leaped at the chance.

The thought at the time was that casinos could take away some customers, thus the casiNO campaign. As we now know, casinos took away a majority of the customers, and as a result, the situation is casinos are the magic bullet used to save racing. No one had this vision at the time you are talking about.

There were no internet boards back in that day but I know myself and others had that vision. The more you resist change, there is always a strong chance that you are more likely to fail. Those who accept, adapt and embrace change become a part of the process and are more likely to succeed. To be honest, I have a certain amount of disdain for the slots people. My only experience at one of those places was pure negative (and I didn't lose a penny). It's not my cup of tea but if it makes others happy to plug a quarter or a thousand quarters into a machine and hope for a miracle, god bless them.

There were no internet boards back in that day but I know myself and others had that vision. The more you resist change, there is always a strong chance that you are more likely to fail. Those who accept, adapt and embrace change become a part of the process and are more likely to succeed. To be honest, I have a certain amount of disdain for the slots people. My only experience at one of those places was pure negative (and I didn't lose a penny). It's not my cup of tea but if it makes others happy to plug a quarter or a thousand quarters into a machine and hope for a miracle, god bless them.

Mick, you were truly a man of vision then. At that time, it was hard to envision casinos anywhere else but Las Vegas, let alone in the state of Illinois. Although, if you had tried to follow up on your vision, I am sure racing people would have laughed at the idea, as well as the lawmakers. How times have changed!

Mick, you were truly a man of vision then. At that time, it was hard to envision casinos anywhere else but Las Vegas, let alone in the state of Illinois.

Illinois already had riverboat casinos during the "casiNO" blunder. It was the proximity to Taj Duch (down the road a little in Elgin) that RLD was most worried about...when he found out HE couldn't have a casino, that is.

Illinois already had riverboat casinos during the "casiNO" blunder. It was the proximity to Taj Duch (down the road a little in Elgin) that RLD was most worried about...when he found out HE couldn't have a casino, that is.

I think the idea then was to head them off at the pass, which is what casinos are successfully doing with slots at the tracks now. We or Mr. D did not accomplish that, so then came the "let's join them" idea with the 10th casino. We all know the mess that turned into. Now we are into "begging" time. Like people in those past days, I cannot see into the future and know exactly what to do for racing. Can you, HV? How is that for a revision of history?

Like people in those past days, I cannot see into the future and know exactly what to do for racing. Can you, HV? How is that for a revision of history?

Yes, I can. I've been saying so, here, for years: as soon as RLD is OUT of the picture in Illinois racing, we will get slots / casinos / VLTs -- whatever the flavor of the week is at that time. Until then, nothing. Let me repeat that: NOTHING.

Nobody here has ever wanted to believe what I heard Mike Madigan say over 10 years ago, just after RLD pulled his closing of AP stunt, "...yeah, well, it'll be a cold day in hell before we give that old *** a dime...". I don't even bother to come out and pooh-pooh the latest and greatest rounds of "We're Almost There!!" threads every time a bill gathers a little steam downstate -- I already know where it's going. Nobody gets nothing decent in this state without Mike Madigan's stamp of approval, and Madigan wouldn't piss on RLD if the old man was burning to a crisp.

So, what I would do is urge RLD to divest himself completely of all racing-related holdings, ASAP, and get out of the game forever...if he really wants to save Illinois racing.

(RLD has been told this, repeatedly, by the way...and you can see how fast he is exiting the scene, so that racing here can move forward. That's why this "Mr. D. is bullish on racing" stuff is just a bunch of )

You phrased your question carefully Mel so I will answer with equal care.

This is just my opinion but RLD rejected the idea of casinos in Illinois and fought that change as hard as possible. My opionion at the time and now is that he should have embraced that change and looked forward to how racing could benefit from casinos.

As long as I remember, he wanted casino action at Arlington. He didn't want the casinos elsewhere because he new racing needed it to survive and the only way racing would get its fair share is to have it at the facility. Oaklawn is a great example on how they should work together. I see as Mr. D being right all along. He had forsight and vision that is now seen by me as astounding. As far as Mr. D protecting his own interests, God bless him! Which one of us wouldn't do the same?

Nobody here has ever wanted to believe what I heard Mike Madigan say over 10 years ago, just after RLD pulled his closing of AP stunt, "...yeah, well, it'll be a cold day in hell before we give that old *** a dime...".Illinois racing.

When it comes to being a fool and a idiot, Mike Madigan can hoist the trophy!

Why you people keep voting for that idiot puzzles me.

In any event, you deserve what you get! Good luck with that income tax hike!

Of course! He wanted the casino at Arlington! Get your head out of your ass and talk to someone that knows him!

No problem, Mel -- just give me YOUR source for this information (via PM, if necessary), and I'll be glad to give him or her a call and verify it...because it is the direct opposite of what my friends that worked for AP at the time told me what was being said and done there.

Hey, maybe my sources were incorrect...so just tell me who to call, and we will get to the bottom of this. Thanks.

Of course! He wanted the casino at Arlington! Get your head out of your ass and talk to someone that knows him!

Who knows what goes on behind closed doors? I am not privy to that information. But the newspapers all said that RLD was against casiNOs period. There was no talk of casinos at the track (as there should have been). Boats were the only way to get a casino and all that I read at the time was that RLD considered them a threat and wanted them gone. There was no word in the press about him wanting one at AP.

At some point he likely considered that they would be a benefit. I don't know maybe he came to that conclusion much earlier and was rebuffed. That might explain why he was so vehement against casinos (because he was cut out of the action). In hindsight, he could have tried working with the casino and state at the beginning instead of all the rhetoric. I think he'd of had his slots and a casino by now if he had embraced the change instead of fighting it.

Who knows what goes on behind closed doors? I am not privy to that information. But the newspapers all said that RLD was against casiNOs period. There was no talk of casinos at the track (as there should have been). Boats were the only way to get a casino and all that I read at the time was that RLD considered them a threat and wanted them gone. There was no word in the press about him wanting one at AP.

At some point he likely considered that they would be a benefit. I don't know maybe he came to that conclusion much earlier and was rebuffed. That might explain why he was so vehement against casinos (because he was cut out of the action). In hindsight, he could have tried working with the casino and state at the beginning instead of all the rhetoric. I think he'd of had his slots and a casino by now if he had embraced the change instead of fighting it.

They will never give him slots at the track because he would attract to large of a market share. In any event, its all a matter of opinion fueled by what we know.